Dragon Age: Inquisition

[CharlesPhipps]

Ah the Templar/Mage conflict. Dragon Age 1 provided the setup, Dragon Age 2 was all buildup and then kicked it off, and Inquisition moved past it as fast as possible.

Unfortunately 2 made everyone sick of it by making it clear both sides are complete assholes.

[Ikiry0]

Honestly, I never 100% got why in Inquisition you *can't* get both sides. The Templar mission never really seemed time critical and you spend most of your time with the Templars fighting Templars. Especially with how you have the option to just flat declare 'The Templars are Disbanded' and that's a *success* for getting the Templars.

[Riedquat]

Whilst that's true I've also grown rather tired of "Which particular bunch of arseholes do you want to cheer on?" type choices, and it's hard to have two sides wanting to annhialate each other without making at least one of them like that (then it's the easy choice) or both (when it's a tedious "I'd rather say sod off to the lot of you" choice).

That's fair, and I agree the Dragon Age 2 did that particular form of choice difficulty way too much and it should not have been repeated. I guess, I just wanted to see like the reverse of what happened in the game, the Templars seeming reasonable to you and the mages being unreasonable, since the veteran players are just going to naturally have a pro-mage bias anyway. I am pro-mage by the way, I just like the Templar level way more and Sir Barris was just a better addition than Fiona was, which is weird since she's Alistair's mom (You would think she would do more than just stand near a bookshelf in skyhold but whatever).

edit: spelling,

What might've been neat, at least for a short while until people cottoned on, was if there were two slightly different versions of the story and it was a bit random which one you got. Although metagaming tends to trivialise such things so maybe it wouldn't have worked and would've just annoyed players wanting a particular playthrough.

[CharlesPhipps]

Honestly, I never 100% got why in Inquisition you *can't* get both sides. The Templar mission never really seemed time critical and you spend most of your time with the Templars fighting Templars. Especially with how you have the option to just flat declare 'The Templars are Disbanded' and that's a *success* for getting the Templars.

Its an artificial illusion of consequence. All it did was make the game shorter.

[Poipoi]

Whilst that's true I've also grown rather tired of "Which particular bunch of arseholes do you want to cheer on?" type choices, and it's hard to have two sides wanting to annhialate each other without making at least one of them like that (then it's the easy choice) or both (when it's a tedious "I'd rather say sod off to the lot of you" choice).

That's fair, and I agree the Dragon Age 2 did that particular form of choice difficulty way too much and it should not have been repeated. I guess, I just wanted to see like the reverse of what happened in the game, the Templars seeming reasonable to you and the mages being unreasonable, since the veteran players are just going to naturally have a pro-mage bias anyway. I am pro-mage by the way, I just like the Templar level way more and Sir Barris was just a better addition than Fiona was, which is weird since she's Alistair's mom (You would think she would do more than just stand near a bookshelf in skyhold but whatever).

edit: spelling,

What might've been neat, at least for a short while until people cottoned on, was if there were two slightly different versions of the story and it was a bit random which one you got. Although metagaming tends to trivialize such things so maybe it wouldn't have worked and would've just annoyed players wanting a particular playthrough.

I do like having my choices matter. So having it randomized would turn me off. The game would have to be very very fun for me to forgive that. Example: Bioshock Infinite which claimed, before the game came out, that your choices will matter ( It didn't). And DA 2 which your choices don't stop or affect the major events of the story. I have yet to go back to Bioshock's third game but I have played DA2 alot.

Btw I tend to side with the mages in Inquisition because I enjoy that quest line a little more than the Templars.

[Riedquat]

I do like having my choices matter. So having it randomized would turn me off. The game would have to be very very fun for me to forgive that. Example: Bioshock Infinite which claimed, before the game came out, that your choices will matter ( It didn't). And DA 2 which your choices don't stop or affect the major events of the story. I have yet to go back to Bioshock's third game but I have played DA2 alot.

Btw I tend to side with the mages in Inquisition because I enjoy that quest line a little more than the Templars.

I mean randomised in that the circumstances leading up to a choice aren't always the same rather than the outcome.

[TGLS]

I mean randomised in that the circumstances leading up to a choice aren't always the same rather than the outcome.

So like getting the choice served up randomly, or like there's a random chance you'll get particular Templar/Mage vignettes?

[chaos42]

i think the problem is that the passage of time the events at red cliff and the events at the templar castle are happening around the same time -going to deal with one means that the plots for the others happen, though the exact nature of the mage ones weird due to time travel stuff. but thats only because they put it in that way they could have very easily made it so you have to be the bridge that brings both side together, but they made it so you spend the game either fighting red templars or red mages either way your fighting red lyrium monsters

[Beelzquill]

I also don't love the Red Cliffe level because . . . Time Magic. I really don't like time magic being added into the Dragon Age setting (insert that's what Thedas means joke here) because this is a setting that should not be about time travel and thus is not going to properly develop it in a well structured way.

Another problem with this level is everybody's insistance, even Varric, who possibly helped free the guy and doesn't respect him or worship him at all, on calling Corypheus the Elder One rather than his name a year after he conquered everything. It makes no damn sense why it's still a mystery other than just so you the player can get a dramatic reveal later. Honestly, it would have been better had they just casually revealed his name to you when you free your companions in the dungeon and have the players who sided with the mages get a head's up or something instead of the artificially identical reveal of knowledge for both playthroughs.

[RobbyB1982]

My big issue with the Corphy reveal is that... I didn't place teh DLC for DA2. I really like the game, played through it twice, but wasn't inspired to play the DLC.

And yet it was the single most important thing to actually carry to the next game. So when I started Inquisition, even thoguh I'd played through DA2, twice! and loved Varric, I was still lost and confused.

So them assuming the players didn't know anything about the guy was the safe way to go... though made weird because of Varric being there.